Which Browsers are protected under which versions?

C

caterwaul

New member
I have SpyBot version 1.3. My computer is a Pentium II, 400 MHz and I only have 96 RAM and use WIN98SE so I am reluctant to use any higher versions due to potential resource issues.

I currently have IE6 and Firefox 2 as my browsers.

SpyBot refers to IE protection as far as immunization is concerned and the help for immunization also refers to the Opera Browser as well.

Does SpyBot also protect the Firefox browser using the SpyBot version 1.3?

If not which is the oldest version that does protect Firefox and will it work with WIN98SE considering my limited 96 RAM?

Also I cannot find anywhere in help or any web links that supply me with this information. Can anyone please direct me to a web link that has this information as far as browser protection and minimum requirements as well?

Thanks in advance. :cool:
 
Hello,

Any reason why you did not upgrade yet?

The immunization of version 1.3 does not cover FireFox.
And the SDHelper is only for Internet Explorer.

So i suggest to upgrade to version 1.5.2 which supports FireFox.
You will find links to several download locations on our website.
These mirrors are partners who provide places to host Spybot-S&D for us.
You can download from one of them, it's secure and they all contain the same data:
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/mirrors/index.html

Best regards
Sandra
Team Spybot
 
SpyBot works but causes other problems.

Thanks for the reply. To answer your question... YES... there is a reason I have not upgraded to v. 1.5.2.

The reason is what I had posted in regards to my system resources and is why I had asked about which version is the "oldest" that supports Firefix2. Basically my concern is that my limited resources could be a problem either with Spybot or other applications.

Anyway I went ahead and installed the v. 1.5.2. It installed without any problems. I had removed the previous version prior to installing the upgrade. SpyBot v 1.5.2 worked without any problems but as I thought might be an issue I had problems with programs other than SpyBot.

I had a desktop application I have running crash after awhile and had a "blue screen" error when rebooting. I can probably work around these problems but I had problems with Firefox Browser as well, which is the reason for me to upgrade in the first place.

What is really a problem that I can't seem to work around is the following:

The problem is that SpyBot seems to be blocking a cookie I need to have for my startup page. I have sent all cookies related to this page to be ignored on a scan but this doesn't help apparently as far as immunization is concerned.

If I turn immunization off for cookies then I have no problems with Firefox but if I have cookies immunized with SpyBot then I cannot set Firefox to "allow" the cookie. I set the cookie to "allow" and I see the new setting but it does not hold. Next time I check Firefox it is "blocked" again. This prevents my startup page to work.

The second problem I have is that if I immunize everything for Firefox in SpyBot it causes me to be unable to even get to the Tool to options to set cookies at all. In fact I can't access links of any kind in Firefox without an error saying "Unrecognized Script". I then have to either "ignore" and not access what I want or click on the "continue" button which then will usually eventually bring up what I want but with considerable delay.

But as I said even when I access the cookie settings in Firefox they do not hold with cookies immunized.

I think that the "Unrecognized Script" problem is likely due to a resource issue considering I only have 96 RAM and that when I have all of the Firefox items immunized there is to much delay to access the link.

And if I don't immunize Firefox at all then there is no problem using Firefox functions at all and they work fine. So this would clearly point to the fact that by immunizing Firefox it causes to much delay using the browser it would seem.

As far as not being able to set a cookie to "allow" in Firefox with cookies immunized I have no idea why?

But as you can see if using SpyBot 1.5.2 in order to immunize Firefox means that functions in Firefox do not work properly when Firefox IS immunized then it basically defeats my purpose.

This is why I was asking which was the "oldest version of SpyBot that will work with Firefox"? (paraphrase).

My impression is that 1.5 is the oldest so I guess I'll have to go back to my 1.3 version since 1.4 has the TeaTimer problem.
 
Last edited:
If that's how I see it... the oldest would be v.1.0 :laugh:.

SDHELPER is a real-time protection for IE in Spybot-SD.

There shouldn't be any problems with Spybot-SD v. 1.5.2.20 with Firefox 2. My aunt's Windows ME has 64MB of RAM with Firefox 2.0.0.14 and Spybot 1.5.2.20 and it ran smoothly.

I wouldn't suggest downgrading because the latest version (1.5.2.20) provides much more stability and performance compared to the previous versions.

What is your "start-up" page?
I was thinking that you might want to Immunize first, then "remove" the cookies from the EXCEPTIONS TAB in the PRIVACY SECTION of Firefox's OPTIONS.
--
caterwaul said:
This is why I was asking which was the "oldest version of SpyBot that will work with Firefox"? (paraphrase).
Click to expand...

I'm sure that support for v.1.4 is continued so Firefox on Version 1.4 might be able to immunize. Although, I'm not sure if earlier versions may Immunize the latest version of FF correctly. Heck, I'm not even sure if earlier versions are supported.
 
@caterwaul

As far as I know 1.3 is no longer supported and it is unlikley you will download updates for it.
 
Last edited:
@caterwaul

There was a standalone fix released for the Tea Timer Graphic problem but I don't know if it is still avaliable:grandpa:.
 
Thanks for the replies. For everyone's information I have been updating with v 1.3 all along. In fact I just did an update and immunization today with no problem.

I would hope that SpyBot would continue to allow updates since in some cases people cannot use higher versions for various reasons.

In my case since v 1.5 does not work for me and I was really just looking for Firefox to work with SpyBot I will maybe try 1.4 and add the teatimer fix. But not for awhile since I spent so much time, 2 days, trying to get v 1.5 to work without success I'll take a break for now.

I guess I am to understand that v1.4 does support Firefox. As far as the teatimer fix I am sure it is still available.

Oh, btw, can anyone that is now currently USING V1.4 please verify that it does protect Firefox... please... thanks....

I still haven't really had anyone totally substantiate that v1.4 does immunize Firefox....
 
Last edited:
caterwaul:

caterwaul said:
... I guess I am to understand that v1.4 does support Firefox. ...
Click to expand...
Not for immunization.

spybotsandra said:
... So i suggest to upgrade to version 1.5.2 which supports FireFox. ...
Click to expand...

caterwaul said:
... still haven't really had anyone totally substantiate that v1.4 does immunize Firefox....
Click to expand...
Immunization for Mozilla products (Firefox, Opera, etc.) was not added until Spybot 1.5 and does not work for some of the latest versions of Mozilla products. Spybot 1.6 (which is still in beta testing) appears to be able to immunize even the latest versions of Mozilla products.
 
PepiMK said:
As for immunization, I could offer it as a stand-alone tool (was one during first testing anyway).
But with 96 MB, I doubt Firefox would be a solution. Sounds more like a case for Opera, which is nicer to the RAM, at least here ;)
Click to expand...

Actually after playing around with SpyBot1.5.2 I was able to get everything to work without any problems including full "immunization" of both Firefox and IE. It all came down to the probable RAM issue when shutting down as far as an apparent problem closing the SpyBot1.5.2 program during the shutdown phase ultimately always resulting in a specific Fatal Exception error every time when SpyBot teatime is running.

So the program is totally functional it is just stopping the process on shutdown that appears to be the problem. :sad:

Oh well... Thanks for all the info anyway, really appreciated. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top